STATE OF M P Vs. PUNAJI DHURVE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for confirmation of sentence of death imposed upon accused Punaji for the offences punishable under Section 302, Indian Penal Code for committing murder of six persons. He has also filed an appeal under Section 374, Cr. PC challenging his conviction under Sections 302 and 436, IPC. He has been sentenced to imprisonment for ten years and to a fine of Re. 1/- for the offence punishable under Section 436, IPC. The reference and the appeal are being decided by this judgment.

(2.) IT is no longer in dispute that accused Punaji has a house in Village Juna Padhurna in a field. This house consists of two rooms as shown in the site plan (Ex. P-11 ). That has been more clearly described in the map annexed to the report (Ex. P-18) of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar. Accused Punaji was living with his wife and four daughters in one room. The other room was in occupation of deceased Suresh. There was an internal door between the two rooms. These have been clearly described in the map (Ex, P-18-A ). There is a window in the room which was in occupation of accused Punaji. Deceased Ujrabai was wife of accused Punaji and four daughters were Anita, Sangita, Sunanda and Rangita who were between 2-10 years of age. They were sleeping in the room in the occupation of accused in the intervening night of 28th and 29th November, 2000. They died on account of the burn injuries. Suresh who was living in the other room also died in this incident and his dead body was found not in his own room but in the room in the occupation of accused Punaji. Thus, in all six persons have died. The family members of deceased Suresh were not in the house on that night. The panchnamas of the dead bodies were prepared on 29-11-2000 and these are Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-6. The dead bodies were sent for post-mortem examination. Dr. Subash Sakargay (P. W. 4) and Dr. Anil Kadwc (P. W. 19) conducted the autopsy on these dead bodies. The post-mortem reports are Ex. P-8, Ex. P-9, Ex. P-10, Ex. P-58, Ex. P-59 and Ex. P-60. Accused Punaji was also medically examined on 29-11-2000 by Dr. Vishveswar (P. W. 10) and he had also some superficial burn injuries on his body. The prosecution has not alleged any motive which impelled the accused to cause fire in his own house.

(3.) THE prosecution case is that accused Punaji poured kerosene on the persons who have died and ignited the fire. There is no direct evidence against him. The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. According to the prosecution, the fire was not accidental and the fire emanated from inside the house as per reports of the experts who inspected the scene of occurrence. The kerosene was used as the medium. The accused was inside the house when the fire took place but he came out of the house after causing the fire and again he entered his house and he was found sitting on the window shown as W. 3 in the map (Ex. P-18-A ). The clothes of the accused did not burn and there was no carbon on them. It is also the prosecution case that the accused was not inside the room when the flames rose and engulfed the deceased persons. The accused did not shout for any help. The bodies of the deceased persons were found in one room and that shows that they died on account of the burn injuries when they were sleeping and they made no attempt to run away from the place of incident or to save themselves from fire.